MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CA codes.

2023· article· en· W6885925953 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicMedical Coding and Health Information
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReceiptMental healthOddsSocioeconomic statusOdds ratioPoison controlOccupational safety and healthInjury prevention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<div> Introduction Traumatic physical injuries are the number one cause of hospitalization and death among children in Canada. The majority of these injuries are preventable. The burden from injury can be reduced through prevention programs tailored to at-risk groups, however, existing research does not provide a strong explanation of how social factors influence a child’s risk of injury. We propose a theoretical framework to better understand social factors and injury in children and will examine the association between these social factors and physical traumatic injury in children using large population-wide data. Methods and analysis We will examine data from 11,000 children hospitalized for traumatic physical injury and 55,000 matched uninjured children by linking longitudinal administrative and clinical data contained at the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy. We will examine 14 social determinants of child health measures from our theoretical framework, including receipt of income assistance, rural/urban status, socioeconomic status, children in care, child mental disorder, and parental factors (involvement with criminal justice system, education, social housing, immigration status, high residential mobility, mother’s age at first birth, maternal Axis I mental disorder, maternal Axis II mental disorder and maternal physical disorder) to identify groups and periods of time when children are at greatest risk for traumatic physical injury. A conditional multivariable logistic regression model will be calculated (including all social determinant measures) to determine odds ratios and adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval) for cases (injured) and controls (non-injured). Ethics and dissemination Health Information Privacy Committee (HIPC No. 2017/2018-75) and local ethics approval (H2018-123) were obtained. Once social measures have been identified through statistical modelling, we will determine how they fit into a Haddon matrix to identify appropriate areas for intervention. Knowing these risk factors will guide decision-makers and health policy. </div>

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.378
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3210.103

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.413
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.080 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicMedical Coding and Health InformationFrench-language works237,207